<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (10) TMI 794 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779998</link>
    <description>HC held that where requested information pertains to a third party, the mandatory Section 11 notice procedure under the RTI Act must be followed before disclosure; Section 8 and 11 are to be read together. The court found no prima facie evidence of large-scale fraud or sufficient public interest to override confidentiality, and noted Section 158 of the GST Act bars disclosure of GST information to third parties. Consequently, the petition seeking GST returns was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2025 08:30:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=858744" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (10) TMI 794 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779998</link>
      <description>HC held that where requested information pertains to a third party, the mandatory Section 11 notice procedure under the RTI Act must be followed before disclosure; Section 8 and 11 are to be read together. The court found no prima facie evidence of large-scale fraud or sufficient public interest to override confidentiality, and noted Section 158 of the GST Act bars disclosure of GST information to third parties. Consequently, the petition seeking GST returns was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779998</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>